I listened to this brilliant show by Andrew Klavan, which has caused me to soften my horror at Moore. Basically (yes, it's too long for most of you to listen), there are two accusers. One is a known liar and the other was 16 when he was in his 30s, and it's not illegal to kiss someone whose 16 in the state.

Glacier wrote:I listened to this brilliant show by Andrew Klavan, which has caused me to soften my horror at Moore. Basically (yes, it's too long for most of you to listen), there are two accusers. One is a known liar and the other was 16 when he was in his 30s, and it's not illegal to kiss someone whose 16 in the state.

There are 8 accusers. Does Klavan properly explain what the situation is with all 8 or does he cherry pick 2? I just expect more apologist alt-right nonsense from Klavan, but maybe he has something of value for once.

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Explains why so few people reply to me, and why I might not reply

Ya, Klavan, that Jew is a anti-Semite alt-right, just like the guy in Ontario who "outted" Lindsay Shepherd as an alt-right nazi who himself was kicked out of university for being an extreme anti-Semite. hmmkay, maybe you shouldn't jump to such conclusions before the dirt gets dug up on you.

As for the eight, you have a good point. It looks like it comes from Ann Coulter who claims that only 2 warrant national attention (whatever that means). The others weren't sexual or what? I don't know what she means. Is it a trick to downplay it? Probably... http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2017-12-06.html

EDIT: I re-listened to the piece. There are only two women who are accusing him of sexual misconduct, and one is a habitual liar. The other women say they dated him when in their teens, but he didn't do anything wrong. Lots of people in their late 20s and 30s dated teenagers 30 years ago. That is not to excuse it at all, but it helps with context.

Last edited by Glacier on Dec 7th, 2017, 6:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Glacier wrote:...other was 16 when he was in his 30s, and it's not illegal to kiss someone whose 16 in the state.

Might not have been technically illegal, but join reality, show me a 30 year old with an interest in a 16 year old, and I'll show you one serious creep. In a better reality, he'd have learned the hard way about one of the uses for a veterinary scalpel from my the farming days of my youth.

Keith Duhaime wrote:Might not have been technically illegal, but join reality, show me a 30 year old with an interest in a 16 year old, and I'll show you one serious creep. In a better reality, he'd have learned the hard way about one of the uses for a veterinary scalpel from my the farming days of my youth.

I agree, but back in the day, him, Jerry Seinfeld, and society at large thought it was normal. We know better today (or at least social normals tell us it is).

Glacier wrote:Ya, Klavan, that Jew is a anti-Semite alt-right, just like the guy in Ontario who "outted" Lindsay Shepherd as an alt-right nazi who himself was kicked out of university for being an extreme anti-Semite. hmmkay, maybe you shouldn't jump to such conclusions before the dirt gets dug up on you.

As for the eight, you have a good point. It looks like it comes from Ann Coulter who claims that only 2 warrant national attention (whatever that means). The others weren't sexual or what? I don't know what she means. Is it a trick to downplay it? Probably... http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2017-12-06.html

Not all alt-right are anti-semites, that's more the reserve of the far-right, and he has shown a lot in common with the alt-right, such as dismissing main-stream media, Islamophobia, supporting Trump, claiming to be pro-liberty, but being homophobic, etc. Yes, I know it's a stretch to call him alt-right, but it certainly isn't to suggest that he appeals to many who are so and I suspect he does so knowingly and intentionally.

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Explains why so few people reply to me, and why I might not reply

Glacier wrote:Being against Moore because he's a sex predator is great... so long as you're morally consistent when Al Franken is up for re-election. Most voters, however, don't vote based on how virtuous the candidates are. Some do, but the question is, will it be enough to close the gap?

Glacier, I must admit, I've liked Franken over the years, and up to the 3rd woman to tell her story, didn't think he'd have to resign. But over the past week or two, it's become clear that he must.

What he might have done, rather than resign outright; offer to immediately resign, the moment Trump does. And/or the instant that Roy Moore drops out of his Senate race. But that's a pipe dream, of course.

Franken did make excellent points when he read his statement re Trump and Moore -- about the irony of the President having admitted on tape to using his power and status to sexually assault women. And Moore being a child molester, and his candidacy fully supported by his party.

The learning here for men who are accused of sexual assault -- deny everything. The honest ones like Franken will be forced to resign, having 'manned up' and admitted their sins. While Trump et al, continue to enjoy their lofty positions.

"What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence". Christopher Hitchens

Verum wrote:Not all alt-right are anti-semites, that's more the reserve of the far-right, and he has shown a lot in common with the alt-right, such as dismissing main-stream media, Islamophobia, supporting Trump, claiming to be pro-liberty, but being homophobic, etc. Yes, I know it's a stretch to call him alt-right, but it certainly isn't to suggest that he appeals to many who are so and I suspect he does so knowingly and intentionally.

Fair enough, I find the definition of "alt-right" are to nail down. I would take issue with you labelling Klavan as a homophobe though since he's pretty liberal about sex and has never opposed gay rights.

Corfman says Moore drove her to his home, where he took off his clothes except for his underwear, kissed her, removed her pants and shirt, touched her over her bra and panties, and started guiding her hand toward his crotch. She objected and asked him to take her home, which he did. In a written statement quoted by the Post, Moore said "these allegations are completely false." But if they are true, Zeigler says, it would simply mean that "he went a little too far and he stopped."

Now to be clear all women accusing roy moore have done so in public on the record and with others to back the claims. To date roy moore refuses to testify under oath .Glac assertion that what roy moore did when 30 was legal is flat out wrong

Just because back in the days,the bible was,written pedophilia,was,accepted doesnt have any effect on our times or laws,. Glac wants to call them liars but they are willing to talk under oath .roy moore wont yet .but if he wins the ethics investigation to follow will be under oath

As used in this section, sex act means sexual intercourse with any penetration, however slight; emission is not required.

So no crime, but the law does not determine if it's moral or not. Nor does the Bible for that matter. There was no magic cut-off of 16 back when that book was written, nor are there any examples of an older man sleeping with a teenager.

What Moore did was wrong, but not illegal. What Franken did may have been illegal, but perhaps less wrong.

Keith Duhaime wrote:There's more to Moore than being a hebephile. The man's a card carrying member of the 6500 year old flat earth society. He's a poster boy for homophobia. He probably believes the US Constitution is divinely inspired, maybe even dictated to the founding fathers. And though I don't condone Franken's actions, at least he is not a hebephile. The only kind of 'party' Moore belongs in is a branding party,as the guest of honour.

Okay, so sexual abuse done by Moore or Frankin or Trump or Clinton are not important factors when deciding who to vote for?

I think you should read it again.Not only is he a...., he's also a........*bleep*.

bernie428 wrote: I think you should read it again.Not only is he a...., he's also a........*bleep*.

Here's something to think about. The vast majority of the population would never change their vote no matter what. Generally speaking, there's a 2 to 5% in the middle who change, and they determine the winners. But in Alabama, this Roy Moore thing is causing a massive vote switch as the Democrat has a good shot of winning an election they would normally lose by 20 or 30 points. That's a bigger margin than Chrispy Clark won West Kelowna. It would be like if the right-wing party were to be in danger of losing the Peace River riding or have the right-wing party be in competition to win the Downtown East Side riding. You would have to have the biggest sex scandal ever to get a swing like that. Even then, it probably wouldn't happen.

While it sounds depressing that people are still voting for Moore, it's actually massive shift like almost never see anywhere. In other words, the sex allegations are causing voters to jump ship in droves.

bernie428 wrote: I think you should read it again.Not only is he a...., he's also a........*bleep*.

Here's something to think about. The vast majority of the population would never change their vote no matter what. Generally speaking, there's a 2 to 5% in the middle who change, and they determine the winners. But in Alabama, this Roy Moore thing is causing a massive vote switch as the Democrat has a good shot of winning an election they would normally lose by 20 or 30 points. That's a bigger margin than Chrispy Clark won West Kelowna. It would be like if the right-wing party were to be in danger of losing the Peace River riding or have the right-wing party be in competition to win the Downtown East Side riding. You would have to have the biggest sex scandal ever to get a swing like that. Even then, it probably wouldn't happen.

While it sounds depressing that people are still voting for Moore, it's actually massive shift like almost never see anywhere. In other words, the sex allegations are causing voters to jump ship in droves.

It is still a damning indictment of the Republican party of today, Trump and those who continue to support both Trump and Moore that this is the case. It may be true that the Democrat supporters are similarly blindly loyal, I don't know, but I have to admit that I used to think better of the Republican party and now I just think they are morally bankrupt.

"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience." Explains why so few people reply to me, and why I might not reply